I'm assuming they have some kind of new material to improve the armor. New synthetic sh*t or something. They've gotten pretty good at that over the years. I think MIT has been doing a lot of R&D on new types of anti-ballistic material.

My main problem is that they trimmed the helmet. Sure, it provides better field of view, but you're exposing a lot more of the head compared to the old K-Pot, especially the ears! Like a lot of things, I assume they stole the ideas from Special Forces who have an entirely different role and would use something like that because of all the CQB they undertake.

It is suitable for MOUT, but I really don't like slimming down something that should provide the maximum amount of protection. I dunno, maybe just me. Something drilled into me when we were taught to move under fire by digging our Pot into the dirt and crawling forward.

Hell, maybe we've seen the end of large military movements and it'll all be mostly urban fighting. The one thing about the ACH is that it was actually comfortable. I'll give them that. That padding was awesome and entirely customizable.

NewportBarGuy:My main problem is that they trimmed the helmet. Sure, it provides better field of view, but you're exposing a lot more of the head compared to the old K-Pot, especially the ears! Like a lot of things, I assume they stole the ideas from Special Forces who have an entirely different role and would use something like that because of all the CQB they undertake.

It could also have something to do with the recent research on how the old helmets collect and focus IED shockwaves right into the brain.

All right, something is getting garbled like a motherfarker in the transcription, because this would mean basically nothing as far as the efficacy of the helmet is concerned, and LDPE frequently has a weight of like infinity to begin with.

MFAWG:edmo: "Urgent requirement" and "2009." Yup , this is the government I work for.

Trying to make a one size fits all solution for 3 branches of the military maybe a little more complicated than it initially looks.

It's also silly to try.

Army and Marines having the same helmets, fine. They fill similar roles as infantry units. But when you have guys miles away in a boat, they don't need the same kind of helmet. They could wear speedos and tan butter for all the good a helmet is gonna do them if a naval weapon happens to impact where they're standing.

doglover:MFAWG: edmo: "Urgent requirement" and "2009." Yup , this is the government I work for.

Trying to make a one size fits all solution for 3 branches of the military maybe a little more complicated than it initially looks.

It's also silly to try.

Army and Marines having the same helmets, fine. They fill similar roles as infantry units. But when you have guys miles away in a boat, they don't need the same kind of helmet. They could wear speedos and tan butter for all the good a helmet is gonna do them if a naval weapon happens to impact where they're standing.

what about after broadsides are fired and you have to swing over to the enemy ship and sword fight?! didn't think of that did you?!

doglover:MFAWG: edmo: "Urgent requirement" and "2009." Yup , this is the government I work for.

Trying to make a one size fits all solution for 3 branches of the military maybe a little more complicated than it initially looks.

It's also silly to try.

Army and Marines having the same helmets, fine. They fill similar roles as infantry units. But when you have guys miles away in a boat, they don't need the same kind of helmet. They could wear speedos and tan butter for all the good a helmet is gonna do them if a naval weapon happens to impact where they're standing.

This helmet is for the US Marines only. The US Army may decide to use it as well but it's more likely they will see how good the helmet is then spend another few $millions to make their own version of its which will be made in the district/contributor of a different senator.

Anybody remember how freaking awkward it was to fire from the prone position with the old PASGT? The extended back portion would suddenly push forward into your eye line farking up your aim forcing you to try to til the mother up to clear your eye sight only for it to slip right back down. the MICH was a godsend in that department.

doglover:MFAWG: edmo: "Urgent requirement" and "2009." Yup , this is the government I work for.

Trying to make a one size fits all solution for 3 branches of the military maybe a little more complicated than it initially looks.

It's also silly to try.

Army and Marines having the same helmets, fine. They fill similar roles as infantry units. But when you have guys miles away in a boat, they don't need the same kind of helmet. They could wear speedos and tan butter for all the good a helmet is gonna do them if a naval weapon happens to impact where they're standing.

What about hospital corpsmen? The Navy would presumably have an interest in the continued survival of those personnel who are currently assigned to Marine units.

I'm assuming they have some kind of new material to improve the armor. New synthetic sh*t or something. They've gotten pretty good at that over the years. I think MIT has been doing a lot of R&D on new types of anti-ballistic material.

My main problem is that they trimmed the helmet. Sure, it provides better field of view, but you're exposing a lot more of the head compared to the old K-Pot, especially the ears! Like a lot of things, I assume they stole the ideas from Special Forces who have an entirely different role and would use something like that because of all the CQB they undertake.

It is suitable for MOUT, but I really don't like slimming down something that should provide the maximum amount of protection. I dunno, maybe just me. Something drilled into me when we were taught to move under fire by digging our Pot into the dirt and crawling forward.

Hell, maybe we've seen the end of large military movements and it'll all be mostly urban fighting. The one thing about the ACH is that it was actually comfortable. I'll give them that. That padding was awesome and entirely customizable.

It's pretty common to wear a large earmuff-style headset called a VIC system while inside a vehicle in today's military. Gear changes as warfighting changes. The new helmet designs have nothing to do with imitating SF. Wearing VIC headsets is much easier with an ACH than with the old kelvar.

Even with the older helmets, if a bullet hits it directly there was a good chance it would either penetrate anyway or the helmet will shatter. Most of these helmets are only good for saving your brain box from a glancing hit, where they're engineered to deflect a bullet instead of absorbing the full impact.

Not that I disagree, but they did manage to hold off most of the world for the better part of a decade.

/But it turned out the idiot who got the war going was an idiot right on through to the end./Shouldn't take away from the fact that they were the most powerful army the world had ever seen./Everyone copied them.

One Bad Apple:AngryDragon: HotIgneous Intruder: German Army helmets.Interesting.

/Gott Mit Uns!

It is an interesting parallel.

[lh3.ggpht.com image 550x516]

It's almost as if they were designed to fit on the same species.

The predecessor to the PASGT helmet was the M1 helmet worn by the Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Marines, and Navy from 1941 to 1985. Before that was the M1917 helmet (the "Brodie Helmet") used by all US services between 1917 and well into WWII. The US military has almost always had a common helmet for all services, with variations on the basic design of course.

The predecessor to the PASGT helmet was the M1 helmet worn by the Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Marines, and Navy from 1941 to 1985. Before that was the M1917 helmet (the "Brodie Helmet") used by all US services between 1917 and well into WWII. The US military has almost always had a common helmet for all services, with variations on the basic design of course.

As late as the mid 90's the navy still used the Vietnam era steel pots with fiberglass liners for damage control/battle stations.